Eureka daily sentinel. [volume] (Eureka, Nev.) 1871-1887, 1887-01-12
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY BILL.

THE DISTRICT Alto RNEY BILL.
The Nevada Tribune of the 7th instant
in an editoria al on the District Attorney
bill, introduced by Senator Foley, and pre-
tending to write from a common sense
view Of the NATTER" p%ronounces the
bill "as a veritable humbug, and must
prove ultimately imperative" and says:
eff it should become a law the several
counties of the State will be left at the
mercy of a Judicial tribunal that may
arrogate to itself the power not only to
dictate to the ~litigants, but in'effect con-
troll the action Of the Supreme Judges.
We cannot see the sense or reason for
this attack upon the District Judges, nor
the proof that the article was written
with either legal knowledge on common
sense. Briefly, the bill provides that
three District Attorneys shall be elected
by the State; hold their Office for four
years, at a salary Of $1,000 per apnum
The idea is to have a District Attorney
for each District Judge. The services
of the District Attorneys are required in
the District Courts only when the
Court is in session. 1t authorizes the
appointment of deputies in each county.
The counties of this State are now
paying in the aggregate $40, 900 per an.
nun for salaries to District Attorneys,
to say nothing of the fees collected in
some instances. The salaries OF the
District Attorneys under this bill would
be only SIS, 000-a net saving of $1,000
per annum to begin with. 1t is the
same system as is in use in Colorado and
other States. 1t seems to us that the
following points are in favor OF the bill;
1t would secure more competent lawyers
for District Attorneys; it would tend
to emove the prosecuting officer from
local prejudice or influence; it would
dispense with the hiring of special at
torneys by the counties, at high prices,
whenever there is any important bust
ness; and, in cases of great Importance,
the county and State could have the
benefit of the advice and assistance of all
the District Attorneys. We are not
prepared to say that the bill is perfect,
but it certainly presents some strong
points in its favor, and we deprecate the
practice of such inconsiderate attacks
upon proposed legislation as the article
referred to, and we trust the members oil
the Legislature will give the matter their
serious and candid consideration. 1t is
a notorious fact that there is often a
failure of conviction in criminal cases
where it appears to be largely due to the
want Of q vigorous and competent prose
cution, and we know that several Of the
counties have elected as District At
torneys, persons who are not even adj
mitted to practice law, and that the
Courts have often been compelled to EN-.
ploy special counsel, and pay large fees,
because of the lack of competent Dis
trict Attorneys. Now if this bill will
secure a better service, more vigorous
and competent prosecution of criminals,
without enhancing the costs beyond the
measure of increased benefits, we hope
the bill may become a law; and
whether or not it will accomplish this,
we are more willing to trust to the col.
lected discretion and judgment Of the
Senate and Assembly, than to the flip
pant utterances of the Tribune, espe.
cially when, as in this instance, they are
not supported by a single fact or reason.
We are credibly informed that the bill
was examined by the District Judges
and many eminent attorneys before be.
ing introduced, and it met with their
hearty approval. as a measure tending to
a more earnest and impartial prosecution
OF criminals, and better enforcement Of
the penal and revenue laws.